Isnt that nice? Dems at the SOTU dressed in solidarity, with Gov Northam.
Mmmmmmm.......I see some tolerant Dems even wore blackface. Nice.
Posted on 02/14/2019 2:35:52 AM PST by Libloather
The woman who accused Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of sexually assaulting her in Boston 15 years ago says she will now share her allegations with the local district attorney — after the politician threatened to pursue her for filing a “false criminal complaint.”
Suffolk DA Rachael Rollins said earlier Wednesday that she’d reached out to lawyers representing accuser Vanessa Tyson about her allegation that Fairfax forced her to perform oral sex on him during the 2004 Democratic National Convention in Boston.
In a response to the Boston Globe, Fairfax’s spokeswoman reiterated his denial and said he’d cooperate with an investigation — but added that he would also “explore all options with regard to filing his own criminal complaint in response to the filing of a false criminal complaint against him.”
(Excerpt) Read more at nypost.com ...
A crime that might have occurred....fifteen years ago? Go find a jury that would view this in any light and convict the guy. I don’t think Fairfax can be convicted.
Lets look over the 2004 Democratic convention....there might have been 200 guys like Fairfax, and all getting something on the side. Are we going to prosecute all 200?
OTHER VA DEMOCRATS EMBROILED IN THE SEX MESS:
Despite Fairfax's denials, Tyson left a detailed electronic/paper trail. Such evidence is considered "corroboration" by L/E.
And look WHO she told.
<><> In a Dec 2017 text message to VA Cong Bobby Scott, she informed him
of her assault at the hands of Fairfax (then-Va's Lt Gov-Elect).
<><>A senior staffer for Sen Mark Warner (Dem-VA) said Tyson made the Senator
aware of her horrifying sexual assault allegations against Justin Fairfax 10 months ago.
The two VA Democrats responded as one would expect.....disgracefully.
Both Democrats---Cong Scott and Senator Warner---ignored the allegations.
We still do not know who else Tyson told.
Stay tuned.
LAUGH BREAK He’s sucking up big-time. He intends to use the remainder of his term to pursue (cough) racial reconciliation
<><> by tearing down Confederate monuments,
<><> learning more about experiences of African-Americans,
<><> reading “The Case for Reparations” by Ta-Nehisi Coates and Alex Haley’s “Roots”
Yes, she was naive to go to his room with him.....but in no way was her naivety a signal he could sexually assault her.
A superior man would not have taken advantage of her naivety.
Isnt that nice? Dems at the SOTU dressed in solidarity, with Gov Northam.
Mmmmmmm.......I see some tolerant Dems even wore blackface. Nice.
THE rats HAVE BEEN RAPING ALL OF US FOR YEARS
Bill Cosby finally got convicted on a years-old sexual assault charge.
It can happen, that’s why Fairfax is panicking, bringing out the threats
So you believe her without seeing any evidence or testimony?
SHE is the evidence.
People said the same thing about Blasey-Ford.
Source: Virginia Criminal Statute of Limitations Laws
"Virginia law establishes time limits, as do all other states, for how soon after an arrest a prosecutor must file formal criminal charges. The statute of limitations, as these time limits are referred to, are meant to preserve the integrity of evidence and to ensure an efficient justice system. But some of the most serious crimes -- such as rape and murder -- don't have time limits."
....apples and oranges....
Ahhhhh, the 2004 Democrat Convention. Very famous why? It introduced one Barack Obama to the country. And from there, his ‘rise in the Democrat Party’ was meteoric.
When will this country say ENOUGH to the America hating Party?
I wonder when all of those Hollyweird leftists are going to start the million dollar Go Fund Me account for this woman?
Heh.....nice take.
You are probably right but to me the story is that he tried threats and it didn’t scare her off.....of course, Bill Cosby (who wasn’t a politician) did get convicted for a history of “older” charges from 2004.
You’re assuming she is telling the truth.
There exists the possibility that she’s lying about having been forced.
The legal system is too coarse-grained an instrument to resolve such claims 15 years after the fact.
This is why the sexual revolution was designed: as Stalin said, America has three pillars, etc.
One of those being morality.
And if forced to choose between women’s sexual license, and innocent until *proven* guilty, I’m voting to keep the presumption of innocence.
The safeguard (back in the dreaded 1950s) was that women slut shamed each other; a woman’s protestations of outraged virtue were likely true.
Nowadays, the presumption of female purity is long gone, because birth control and “you go g’rllll.”
Women will have to learn, they can’t have it both ways.
Women say they want to be like men ,but they don’t: they just want the latitude of action with guaranteed freedom from consequences.
What do they think the bed on a hotel room is *for*, anyway?
Yes, she was naive to go to his room with him.....but in no way was her naivety a signal he could sexually assault her.
A superior man would not have taken advantage of her naivety.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.